Reliability‐based decision fusion scheme for cooperative spectrum sensing
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, the authors propose a reliability‐based cooperative decision fusion scheme which considers the reliability of the secondary users (SUs') local decisions when making a final decision at the fusion centre in cognitive radios. The authors use past information about the local and global decisions to estimate the reliability of the sensing decision obtained from each SU and then reflect this difference in reliability in the weighting of each SU's decision. The authors formulate the problem of minimising the probability of sensing error at the fusion centre, subject to a limit on the network probability of detection, as a constrained non‐linear integer programming problem. To solve this problem, the authors implement an iterative solution based on the generalised non‐linear Lagrangian relaxation. Simulation results show that our proposed solution can achieve optimal results with zero duality gap using only a few number of iterations. Results also demonstrate that the proposed reliability‐based fusion scheme provides performance improvement, in terms of the minimum probability of sensing error, when compared to the OR and AND fusion schemes. This improvement is more pronounced as the number of users increases since by assigning weights differently to users, the multiuser diversity gain is better exploited.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it